Can I Run It?

Instant compatibility check with FPS benchmarks and optimization tips

Minimum
Third-Person Shooter 2014

Minimum

97%
Excellent Match Your system exceeds recommended requirements!

Performance

1080p (Full HD)

Low 1080p Measured
82 FPS
Ultra 1080p Measured
40 FPS

1440p (2K / QHD)

Low 1440p Measured
53 FPS
Ultra 1440p Measured
26 FPS

4K (Ultra HD)

Low 4K Measured
28 FPS
Ultra 4K Measured
14 FPS
18.9ms Frame Time
28ms Input Latency
4K Best Resolution

Requirements Check

Processor
Required 37,425
Your CPU 53,620
Graphics Card
Required 27,663
Your GPU 28,766

Recommendations

Optimize Settings

Try lowering shadows and anti-aliasing for better FPS.

GPU Upgrade

A better graphics card would significantly improve performance.

Average FPS: resolution vs quality settings

UltraHighMediumLow
4K Ultra HD 14 18 22 28
1440p QHD 26 34 40 53
1080p Full HD 40 53 63 82

Cell color: green is 120+ FPS, teal is 60+, amber is 30+, red is below 30. Cards marked Estimated above have no measured row and are scaled from your GPU benchmark percentile.

Every measured configuration

1920x1080 High 53
1920x1080 Low 82
1920x1080 Medium 63
1920x1080 Ultra 40
2560x1440 High 34
2560x1440 Low 53
2560x1440 Medium 40
2560x1440 Ultra 26
3840x2160 High 18
3840x2160 Low 28
3840x2160 Medium 22
3840x2160 Ultra 14

Performance Analysis: Minimum on Your System

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of an Intel Core i7-14700F and an AMD Radeon RX 570 ranks 3542nd out of 3712 tested combos for Minimum, placing it in the bottom 5% of all configurations. This is a surprisingly low ranking given the CPU's strength, but the GPU becomes the limiting factor in this third-person shooter. The recorded data shows that this pairing sits well below the median performer, and the vast majority of tested systems deliver higher average frame rates. The rank reflects the overall experience across all resolutions and presets, and it is dragged down heavily by the 4K results, where the RX 570 cannot maintain playable performance. Even at 1080p, the combo only manages to clear the 60 FPS threshold on two of the four presets. The CPU itself ranks in the 91st percentile among all processors, but the GPU ranks in the 74th percentile, and that gap in relative strength appears directly in the frame rates. In short, this is a machine where a very capable processor is paired with a graphics card that is several generations behind it, and the game's performance reflects that imbalance.

CPU and GPU Roles

Benchmark results indicate that the GPU is the dominant factor for Minimum across all tested resolutions. The CPU, a 20-core, 28-thread Raptor Lake part with a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, has far more compute headroom than this game requires. The RX 570, on the other hand, with 2048 shading units and a 256-bit memory bus, becomes the bottleneck as resolution increases. The scaling between 1080p and 1440p is telling: at High settings, the average FPS drops from 53 to 34, a decline of roughly 36%. Moving from 1440p to 4K at High settings, the average falls from 34 to 18, another drop of about 47%. This steep degradation as pixel count rises is characteristic of a GPU-limited scenario. The CPU's role is essentially static; it is never the constraint here, as even the lowest GPU-bound frame rates are far above what this processor would struggle to feed. The data also shows that preset changes have a larger impact at lower resolutions. At 1080p, the spread between Low and Ultra is 42 FPS (82 vs 40), while at 4K the same spread is only 14 FPS (28 vs 14). This is because at higher resolutions, the GPU is already saturated, and reducing settings has less effect on the ultimate frame rate. The CPU simply maintains its side of the pipeline, while the RX 570 determines the outcome.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 3840x2160, the recorded averages are 28 FPS on Low, 22 FPS on Medium, 18 FPS on High, and 14 FPS on Ultra. The Medium preset includes a minimum of 19 FPS and a maximum of 25 FPS, but the other presets lack min/max data. None of these settings approach the 60 FPS playable threshold, and even the Low preset sits at less than half of that target. The frame rates are consistently below 30 FPS, which is generally considered the minimum for acceptable motion, and they are far from smooth for a third-person shooter. The 4K results are uniformly unplayable by any reasonable standard.

At 2560x1440, the averages improve but remain below the playable threshold. Low delivers 53 FPS, Medium 40 FPS, High 34 FPS, and Ultra 26 FPS. The Medium preset shows a minimum of 34 FPS and a maximum of 46 FPS, indicating some variance but no spikes into playable territory. The gap between Low and Ultra is 27 FPS, and even the best case (Low at 53 FPS) falls 7 FPS short of the 60 FPS target. The 1440p results are closer to playable than 4K, but they still miss the mark across all presets.

At 1920x1080, the data shows a much healthier picture. Low averages 82 FPS, Medium averages 63 FPS with a minimum of 53 FPS and a maximum of 72 FPS, High averages 53 FPS, and Ultra averages 40 FPS. The Low preset delivers a comfortable margin above 60 FPS, and the Medium preset just clears it with an average of 63 FPS, though its minimum of 53 FPS means occasional dips below the threshold. High and Ultra fall short, with 53 and 40 FPS averages respectively. The jump from Low to Medium costs 19 FPS on average, and from Medium to High another 10 FPS. The 1080p results are the only ones where this combo reaches playable performance, and even then, only on the two lighter presets.

The Verdict

The verdict is clear: this PC can run Minimum at 1920x1080 with Low or Medium settings, and that is the only resolution where it delivers 60 FPS or higher on average. According to the verdict data, the playable settings at 1080p are Low and Medium, with the best average of 63 FPS achieved on Medium. At 2560x1440, there are no playable settings, and the same is true at 3840x2160. The verdict list for both higher resolutions is empty, meaning no preset reaches the 60 FPS threshold. For a game from 2014, this is a disappointing result, but it is consistent with the GPU's age and its position in the 74th percentile. If the target is 1080p gaming, this combo is marginally acceptable, provided the user sticks to Medium or Low presets. For anyone expecting to play at 1440p or 4K, this system will not meet the 60 FPS bar under any settings. The CPU is not the issue; the RX 570 simply does not have enough throughput for higher resolutions in this title. Owners should plan for 1080p gaming with reduced settings, or consider a GPU upgrade if higher resolutions are required.

Similar Performance Alternatives

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database, the Intel Core i7-14700F is closely matched by several other processors. The Intel Xeon 6505P scores 53701 in the average benchmark, which is 0.2% lower than the i7-14700F's 53620. The Intel Xeon Phi 7290 scores 53469, a 0.3% difference. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X scores 53288, coming in 0.6% below, and the AMD EPYC 7313P scores 53206, 0.8% lower. These four CPUs would all behave similarly in Minimum, as the game is not CPU-intensive and all of them are far beyond the required performance level. Any of these alternatives would produce essentially identical frame rates when paired with the same RX 570.

On the GPU side, the AMD Radeon RX 570 has an average benchmark score of 28766. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 6800M at 28874 (0.4% higher), the AMD Radeon R9 M295X at 28580 (0.7% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 470 at 28996 (0.8% higher), and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 at 28421 (1.2% lower). The RX 470 is the most direct comparison, as it shares the same Polaris architecture and a similar performance envelope. Users with an RX 470 would see nearly identical frame rates in Minimum. The RX 6800M, despite being a mobile part, scores close enough that in-game results would be within a few frames. The Quadro RTX 8000, while a much more expensive workstation card, also lands within 1.2% in the aggregate benchmark, meaning its gaming performance here would be comparable. None of these alternatives would change the fundamental conclusion: at 1080p Medium, the combo is right at the edge of 60 FPS, and at higher resolutions, it falls short.

Best Settings per Resolution

At 3840x2160, no preset achieves 60 FPS. The best recorded average is 28 FPS on Low, which is far below the playable threshold. The verdict data confirms that there are no playable settings at this resolution. Users should not expect a smooth experience at 4K, and the recommendation is to avoid this resolution entirely for Minimum.

At 2560x1440, the situation is similar. No preset reaches 60 FPS, and the best average is 53 FPS on Low. That is 7 FPS short of the target, and even that setting will dip below 50 FPS at times. The verdict lists no playable settings for 1440p. The closest option is Low, but it does not meet the threshold.

At 1920x1080, the most demanding preset that stays at or above 60 FPS is Medium, with an average of 63 FPS. This preset also records a minimum of 53 FPS and a maximum of 72 FPS, so while the average clears the bar, there are occasional drops below it. Low is the safer choice, with an average of 82 FPS and no minimum data suggesting severe dips, but Medium is the highest preset that qualifies under the 60 FPS average rule. High and Ultra both fall below the threshold, with averages of 53 and 40 FPS respectively. The best settings for this combo, therefore, are 1920x1080 with Medium quality, delivering the highest visual fidelity while maintaining an average above 60 FPS.